Agano Party presidential flag bearer David Mwaure’s performance during the presidential debate was a stark contrast to his deputy Ruth Mucheru during the running mates debate a week ago.
During the first tier of the presidential debate at Catholic University of East Africa in Karen, Nairobi, on Tuesday, Mr Mwaure had a field day as his competitor Roots Party’s George Wajackoyah snubbed the event.
This not only gave Agano Party presidential candidate time to get into his element, but also “preach” about the need for change.
Solemn and confident, Mwaure shot from the hip making his stand against corruption known and how he plans to revive the economy.
To deal with the high cost of living, he proposed a 50 per cent reduction in Pay as You Earn (PAYE). He would also rid the country of punitive tax measures as well as create jobs for youth by reviving cottage industries.
Mwaure also addressed mental health, agriculture, the environment and emerging monkey pox threat.
All the while, his only “competitor” was the time allocated for him to answer questions from the panelists. Somehow, Prof Wajackoyah’s absence from the debate turned it into an interrogation but also spared Mwaure the verbal ‘attacks’ witnessed during the running mates debate.
Given the controversial nature of the Roots Party’s manifesto - that among other things proposes legalisation of commercial farming of marijuana and sale of hyena testicles as well as snake venom- it was expected that the presidential candidate would dominate the debate and inform the discourse.
His absence, however, gave Mwaure golden opportunity to emphasize need for change in leadership by voting in a man of the cloth with legal expertise and one whose integrity superseded that of his competitors Deputy President William Ruto, Azimio la Umoja One Kenya presidential candidate Raila Odinga and Prof Wajackoyah.
Throughout the 90 minutes allocated for the debate, he carefully chose his words in response to queries shot at him. Mwaure had no one interjecting his responses or hurling expletives at him.
So much so that when he got an opportunity to chide his competitor, he went for it without a care.
“I have read the manifestos of other candidates and I believe I am the only one offering something practical…I am a man of the cloth and the cloth represents who I am. I am a little disappointed that my competitor did not come in. If he did he would have a durag on because that represents who he is,” said Mwaure.
His experience was however different from that of his running mate Ruth Mucheru in a similar debate a week or so ago.
The running mates debate was dominated by interjections, rebuttals and at times high-pitched voices that gave away the nervousness of the competitor.
For Ms Mucheru, hers was to wade off a mettlesome Justina Wamae of Roots Party whose energy and quick rebuttals dictated the pace of the debate.
While the Agano Party presidential running mate spoke to the conservatives, Ms Wamae targeted the liberal-minded, alternately challenging the fallacies linked to the Roots Party manifesto.
“Roots Party might come off as jokers but one thing we are doing is to push your minds to understand that the government needs to help you with the challenges you’re facing. Kenya can do better,” said the Roots Party presidential running mate.
Ms Wamae controlled the debate by having her competitor focus on the Roots Party manifesto; Ms Mucheru spent a huge chunk of the debate expressing her distaste for the legalisation of commercial farming of marijuana and pocking holes into the competitor’s proposal on snake rearing.
“Bhang is illegal and they (Roots Party) know it. We want to know how far they (the Roots Party) will go with it. They are headed in the wrong direction... I’m looking for a happy mother who will attest that their child has smoked and they are okay with it,” stated Ms Mucheru.
Political analysts are however divided on how Prof Wajackoyah’s absence affected the debate. While some felt it gave impetus to Mwaure to sway the 22.1 million voters, others felt his absence lowered the quality of the debate.
Prof Alfred Omenya, urban planner and political expert was not amused by the first session that unavoidably gave prominence to Mwaure’s submission.
“It was good that the debate happened. I was not sure whether the entire presidential debate would make any sense given that two candidates were missing. The first tier of the debate was however neither here nor there. Mwaure spent the time talking about repatriating money hidden abroad…” he said.
On the flip side, Prof James Ole Kiyapi was charmed.
“If nothing else, David Mwaure illuminated and amplified the monster of corruption, he is intolerant to corruption. he brought forth value-based leadership. The biblical Davidic mantle of leadership - integrity of heart and skillfulness of his hands. moderators were also excellent,” he said.
Nyeri Deputy Governor Caroline Karugu said: “Mwaure seemed to be making a good run at the presidency despite being alone at the podium. He seemed to have his agendas here and there although not well articulated.”
